House Rule: Proficiency in all saves

Xeviat said:

Hi everyone.

I've been using this house rule for a while but only up through 7th level. I'd be curious what everyone thinks.

I gave all characters, monsters, and NPCs proficiency in all saves. Since this functions largely as a +2 save bonus in the beginning, I increased the save DC formula from 8+Prof+mod to 10+Prof+mods.

Initially, I was going to give characters +2 to their class saves, but I decided against it. I felt that characters already have their high stats and low stats to differentiate their saving throws.

This does mean I need to address a few classes that get additional saving throw proficiencies to determine what would be good replacements.

I do this because everyone's DCs scale but many saves don't end up scaling. They become larger and larger weak spots, and although one bad save doesn't spell death like it did in older editions, it can still be pretty bad.

What are some consequences you see? Any ideas for what to do with the monk and rogue abilities that grant extra proficiencies?

Click to expand...

So, the problem you were worried about is the scaling of spell DC vs non-favored saves - which is a higher levels growth thing - and that for somr cases it **can be** really bad and you have so far only seen it at 7th and under - where its not yet big.

Also, your chamge affects all save spells and effects, not just those that **can be** really bad.

Hmmm...

Well, its not something i see as a problem that needs fixing and not the approach i would seek if i did* but i would see this as basically making it no longer that meaningful to choose spells to target saves. A slightly less potent soell with a morerare save type wont be taken over a bigger effect with a common save. So, no more picking say a Str save knockdown vs a Dex save falldown or a Cha over a Wis.

So you are likely to see a smaller variety in spell choice.

Also, very likely to see shift to attack roll based effects over saves after 5th in an effort to avoud the nerf entirely - which again, drops the variety.

*The approach i eould have went with is to identify the specific spells you find are too much "save or suck" and tweak them or their saves. This tsrgets the specific whammies while not affecting the scads of spells where a save is called for but failing isnt up to really high suckage. That seems far more targeted and likely to not give as many unexpected consequences.

Could you not just add half your proficiency bonus to untrained saves (+1 to +3)

With that in mind, you might want to make a paladin's save bonus as replacing proficiency (or half proficiency) if higher to avoid breaking bounded accuracy?

So, this house rule would mean that for characters within the same level tier, all saves are functionally d20+mod vs. 10+ mod, since both sides are adding the same bonus for proficiency, effectively cancelling this bonus out. However, adding the proficiency bonus to both sides does mean that for mismatched opponents, the higher level character gets +1 per tier they are above the other character. This will have the effect of significantly reducing variance in chances of a successful save. If both characters are in the same tier and have the same mod, the character rolling the save will have a 50% chance of success. If the character making the save has a negative mod and the caster has a +5, the character has a 25% chance of saving. Most saves will probably fall somewhere in that range, though you might get more variance in the monsters’ favor at higher levels as the PCs start hitting the hard cap of 20 in a score but monsters scores continue to grow.

Of course, the above is pretty much all true of proficient saves currently (except 35-60% instead of 25-50), while non-proficient saves, as you observed, become bigger and bigger weak points. So, if you like the PCs’ chances on proficient saves, giving them proficiency in all saves might do exactly what you want it to. I probably wouldn’t give it to monsters though, or it will become much more difficult for casters to affect monsters with spells that require saves.

Another option you might consider, if you want to shore up the weaknesses of non-proficient saves without making them as good as proficient ones might be to add half proficiency bonus to them, Jack-of-all-trades style.

You'll want consider what to do with abilities that grant proficiency to saving throws, such as the Monk's Diamond Soul feature, the Rogue's Slippery Mind feature, and the Resilient feat. It's simple enough to just ban the feat, but the classes with features that grant proficiency should arguably be compensated in some way.

Fanaelialae said:

You'll want consider what to do with abilities that grant proficiency to saving throws, such as the Monk's Diamond Soul feature, the Rogue's Slippery Mind feature, and the Resilient feat. It's simple enough to just ban the feat, but the classes with features that grant proficiency should arguably be compensated in some way.

Click to expand...

You could grant +2 to the ability score for resilient after all, characters can only take it once per save, and most would want to pump up ability scores relevant to their class, which is likely already proficient in that save. In my view that works better if you use the house rule to spread saves more evenly.

Pauln6 said:

You could grant +2 to the ability score for resilient after all, characters can only take it once per save, and most would want to pump up ability scores relevant to their class, which is likely already proficient in that save. In my view that works better if you use the house rule to spread saves more evenly.

Click to expand...

I am thinking of +2 right now. It will make sure I'm not nerfing currently proficient saves. It is also a more fixed benefit for a feat.